I don't think that question will upset anyone. The only way to know the answer for sure is to sit in Apple's boardroom while they discuss future development of the iPhone.

My speculation is that its business strategy. It costs Apple less to ship 8GB than 16GB. If people are buying the 8 then there is little need to rush to sell 16. In the near future with hardware updates Apple will be able to reenergize sales with an update to 16.

Also, a lot of the supply chain is in place, I'll bet. You can't just yank that chain in the middle of a production/sales cycle.

Tim Cook is gay, believes in climate change, and cares deeply about racial equality. Deal with it (and please spare us if you can't).

But why no 16GB model? You canc learly pack it into the case - see the iPod [Touch]. It just amkes no sense.

I could buy the iPhone now and not get all my music library and podcasts on it opr wait until version 2 and pack it all on. But I just can't understand why Apple had left it when the means are there already.

Worried about upsetting the early US adopters further?

Prolly Apple had a certain profit margin in mind for the Euro iPhone, and adding 8GB more of flash memory to it would've bumped up the cost just enough to hurt either sales or margins to the point where Apple said 'let's wait on that'.

Still, would've been good if they'd offered a higher-trim 16GB model now instead of later. That would seem to be a win-win for everything 'cept inventory control, which isn't that difficult. How many different iPod Nanos does Apple sell now, six? \

They usually count the number of individual contracts, the idea is to find out the true number of market penetration and makes more sense that counting users. Alot of companies charge staff for personal calls so it is often cheaper to get a second phone for personal use - also makes it easier when you go on holiday - you can turn off your work phone, which is a nice thing to do! ;-)

I don't think that question will upset anyone. The only way to know the answer for sure is to sit in Apple's boardroom while they discuss future development of the iPhone.

My speculation is that its business strategy. It costs Apple less to ship 8GB than 16GB. If people are buying the 8 then there is little need to rush to sell 16. In the near future with hardware updates Apple will be able to reenergize sales with an update to 16.

I'm not really sure I get what you mean. I wondered whether Apple's only reason (besides a cynical attempt to squeeze as much rpofit out of the now humbled 8GB iPhone before realeasing one with double the space) was so as not to cause further upset to early adopters by doubling the capacity only weeks after slashing the price. I think that given how little time is expected before Apple doubels the capacity, I presume for something like a similar price point when it comes out, they may find European adopters far thinner ont he ground.

I wondered whether Apple's only reason (besides a cynical attempt to squeeze as much rpofit out of the now humbled 8GB iPhone before realeasing one with double the space) was so as not to cause further upset to early adopters by doubling the capacity only weeks after slashing the price.

They've already got their manufacturing supply chain running. Apple orders millions of iPhones using the same components brings the price down for manufacturing. While in the middle of the run if Apple attempted to change something would upset the chain and raise the price of manufacture. 16GB would also be a more expensive part to add.

Once the initial manufacturing run is finished and they want to change the next run adding 16GB will be cheaper to add.

Quote:

I presume for something like a similar price point when it comes out, they may find European adopters far thinner ont he ground.

Well what other phone can you buy in Europe that comes with 16GB of internal flash memory for the same price?

Well what other phone can you buy in Europe that comes with 16GB of internal flash memory for the same price?

Well, this one is not exactly the same price - seen as it is FREE on an 18 month contract, but it does have 16GB memory - 8GB internal, 8GB flash card.
So yes, maybe not exactly 16GB internal memory, but you can get one today for nothing.

At 18 months it cost 630 quid. It looks like Orange unlimited is 8 quid. Another 40 for 8GB SD card, brings the total to 784 pounds. So its not exactly free.

Two ways its difficult to compare this to the iPhone is that the N95 does not have WiFi and no free WiFi access. Which will be valuable selling point. 8GB microSD is lower performance flash than internal flash modules.

At 18 months it cost 630 quid. It looks like Orange unlimited is 8 quid. Another 40 for 8GB SD card, brings the total to 784 pounds. So its not exactly free.

Two ways its difficult to compare this to the iPhone is that the N95 does not have WiFi and no free WiFi access. Which will be valuable selling point. 8GB microSD is lower performance flash than internal flash modules.

Remember though that with 3G there is not the same need for Wifi!

The question was "Well what other phone can you buy in Europe that comes with 16GB of internal flash memory for the same price?"

Of course no two models will be the same so you cannot compare them properly, the N95 has GPS where the iPhone does not, the N95 has a 5MP camera and a high quality lense where the iPhone does not, the N95 has 3G where the iphone does not, the N95 has MMS where the iPhone does not but the iPhone has cover-flow and multi-touch where the N95 does not.

No but WiFi is faster and more power efficient than 3G. That is a selling point. That is why BlackBerry has added WiFi radio along with its 3G.

My Blackberry does not have wifi.

Wifi could be faster (but this all depends on the speed of your connection, i have used countless wifi hotspots that are delvering slower speeds than 3G.) In Australia it is common to have a 3G wireless connection to repalce your broadband connection.

The biggest most single driver for buying phones with wifi is for the ability to put a SIP client on the phone and use it on an internal enterprise voice network, what is known a dual mode phone. The second is for using consumer IP Telephony clients such as Skype.

Nokia have been producing phones with wifi for a while now, but they are seen as purely business class devices, Cisco have pounced on them for use with their enterprise IP Communciations portfolio - but this is all about corporate wlan voice networks, when you can put a SIP client compatable with leading IPT vendors on an iPhone then things will be different, but it still will not be great for mobile data.

3G is widespread in the UK, wherever you are in most towns and cities in the UK you can get a 3G connection, when i was in the UK i had a 3G card in my laptop and you can could get a stong singal anywhere i was - even on a yacht in the Irish sea.

You just cannot get that coverage with wifi, it is not a mobile data technology, not untl the day when a country such as the UK has 90% blanket coverage with the ability to roam easilt between access points without dropping the connection can wifi ever be called a mobile data technology.

Wifi could be faster (but this all depends on the speed of your connection, i have used countless wifi hotspots that are delvering slower speeds than 3G.)

It would be under the extreme worst case conditions WiFi would be as slow as 3G. Real world UMTS and HDSPA data rates are 384kb and 3.5Mb respectively. Real world WiFi is around 20Mb.

Quote:

3G is widespread in the UK, wherever you are in most towns and cities in the UK you can get a 3G connection, when i was in the UK i had a 3G card in my laptop and you can could get a stong singal anywhere i was - even on a yacht in the Irish sea.

Yes but you are not getting 384kb in all those areas.

Quote:

You just cannot get that coverage with wifi, it is not a mobile data technology

Very true, but as an iPhone user I can attest that WiFi is fast and it is a good selling feature with free hotspots around your city.

edit: The Cloud has 442 hotspots around London. Edinburgh, Leeds, Manchester, Birmingham, Nottingham, Oxford, Cambridge and Liverpool, as well as in the London Boroughs of Kensington & Chelsea, Camden and Islington will all be covered with Cloud WiFi.

Well, this one is not exactly the same price - seen as it is FREE on an 18 month contract, but it does have 16GB memory - 8GB internal, 8GB flash card.
So yes, maybe not exactly 16GB internal memory, but you can get one today for nothing.

It would be under the extreme worst case conditions WiFi would be as slow as 3G. Real world UMTS and HDSPA data rates are 384kb and 3.5Mb respectively. Real world WiFi is around 20Mb.

Sure... unless you're away from a WiFi hotspot. In which case, real-world WiFi is 0.00 Mbps.

WiFi's great, but it's not mobile, and thus isn't a true replacement for 3G. It's just what Apple has to do for now to supplement slow sucky EDGE and superslow supersucky GPRS. And since it's not really a true mobile replacement, talking about relative speeds vs 3G is kinda pointless.

Obviously, the ideal solution would be HSDPA when you're out and about, and WiFi when you're sitting in the coffee shop. That's kinda what most ppl want, and what all the phone makers will be heading towards.

N95 has 160MB and only takes microSD. I can't find a microSD bigger than 2GB, at least on Newegg.

Well, first off there's at least two different N95s. The older one is 160MB internal and only takes microSD. The newer one is called the 'N95 8GB' (as you can see from the branding), and, as you'd imagine, does have 8GB internal memory. Looks like this:

I have no idea if it takes a mem card at all, or what type. It's also possible that the Euro and US versions of the phone could differ there.

Far as microSD cards go, they sure do make 'em bigger than 2GB.

If you don't wanna spend a lot, go for the 4GB... $50 or so on Amazon, if you poke around:

Also saw a 6GB microSDHC card on SanDisk's site... but it's $100. \

Edit- Far as 8GB microSDHC goes, apparently SanDisk has announced 'em, and they're supposed to show up before year's end. Cost is TBA, but obviously you'd expect them to be pricey at first:

WiFi's great, but it's not mobile, and thus isn't a true replacement for 3G.

I agreed to this in my last post.

Quote:

And since it's not really a true mobile replacement, talking about relative speeds vs 3G is kinda pointless.

Its pointless if you have an agenda to exalt 3G and ignore all other reality. An iPhone at a WiFi hot spot the optimum data rate that can be achieved is 54Mb another phone limited to UMTS the optimum data rate is 384kb. This is a far greater difference in speed than there is between EDGE and UMTS.

The next iteration of the iPhone could have 802.11n. Which would bring 248Mb, when Evolved HDSPA moves to 42Mb.

Quote:

Obviously, the ideal solution would be HSDPA when you're out and about, and WiFi when you're sitting in the coffee shop.

I agree. But there is no need to play down the speed of WiFi to play up mobility of 3G. They both have their advantages.

Great. Then why do you compare WiFi and 3G speeds? One is fixed, one is mobile. Different tools for different needs.

Quote:

Its pointless if you have an agenda to exalt 3G and ignore all other reality.

No, its pointless because, as you yourself have agreed, WiFi is not a mobile technology. It doesn't do what 3G does. Comparing speeds for, say, HSDPA vs EVDO might make sense, WiFi vs 3G doesn't.

Far as 'agendas' go, I'm an Apple shareholder, not a Qualcomm one.

Quote:

The next iteration of the iPhone could have 802.11n. Which would bring 248Mb,

Awesome. It still doesn't make WiFi mobile. Maybe if you were talking about WiMax, you might have a point, since that's a (4G) mobile technology.

Quote:

I agree. But there is no need to play down the speed of WiFi to play up mobility of 3G. They both have their advantages.

I think everyone already understands that WiFi is fast. That's not the problem. The problem is that it isn't a true replacement for 3G. Again, WiFi's speed away from a hotspot is 0.00 Mbps. That isn't 'downplaying', that's just the way it is.

The next iteration of the iPhone could have 802.11n. Which would bring 248Mb, when Evolved HDSPA moves to 42Mb. .

Complete Nonsense!

The problem with WiFi is that it is only as fast as the internet connection is. So you can have a 248Mb connection to the access point all you want but if the access point is connected to a 512mb internet connection then you are only sharing 512mb with everyone else in the coffee shop!!! That is real world wifi speeds, so you could easily be on a wifi connection but have a slower internet connection that the 3G user sitting next to you.

Complete Nonsense!
The problem with WiFi is that it is only as fast as the internet connection is

Yes I agree it can depend on the speed of the internet connection, how many people are using it at the same time, how much bandwidth each connection is using. But its not as bad as you are making it out to be.

A large public wifi system would generally use more bandwidth than we have at home, more nodes to handle the traffic, and most usage would just be in short bursts outside of video streaming. Few people would be constantly using bandwidth.

A neighborhood coffee shop you are generally only sharing wifi with around 5 to 10 other users. That doesn't kill bandwidth speed.

The next iteration of the iPhone could have 802.11n. Which would bring 248Mb, when Evolved HDSPA moves to 42Mb.

Do you really think an ARM chip can keep up with a theoretical 248Mbps connection?

The reason people emphasize the 3G over WiFi is because it can far more easily have a significant footprint. Given how many city-wide WiFi attempts fail, it looks like it's easier to deploy 3G over 20 cities than it is to deploy one city-wide WiFi network.

As an aside, I think huge mesh WiFi networks is a fundamental misuse of technology, trying to force a technology into a niche that it simply isn't designed to do, or is capable of doing without excessive inefficiency.

One of the features they removed from the N95 8GB model was the card slot. Obviously they wanted to make it more like Apple. I'm surprised they didn't weld the battery in too.

That's a shame. It's not like microSD card slots take up a lot of room.

For the upcoming wave of iPhone clones, if Apple drags ass on intro'ing a 16GB model, it would be a selling point for the clones to have a good amt of internal memory AND the ability to add on more memory easily via microSD.

After all, the 8GB microSDHC cards will be here by year's end, and they're only gonna get bigger, fast.

It's also nice to only pay for the memory you use... having it be all internal kinda screws over the guy who's only gonna have moderate to minimal content on his phone.

Do you really think an ARM chip can keep up with a theoretical 248Mbps connection?

I'm sure today it won't, but someday it will. Real world "n" is more like 100Mb, I only brought it up to emphasis my point.

Quote:

The reason people emphasize the 3G over WiFi is because it can far more easily have a significant footprint.

Yes I recognize and agree with that. But at the same time when you are at a hot spot WiFi is a lot faster than 3G. Which is why Nokia and Blackberry are beginning to use it.

Quote:

Given how many city-wide WiFi attempts fail, it looks like it's easier to deploy 3G over 20 cities than it is to deploy one city-wide WiFi network.

That has more to do with the politics of business than it does the technology itself. The companies who have invested in paid hot spots don't want free municipal wifi.

Quote:

As an aside, I think huge mesh WiFi networks is a fundamental misuse of technology, trying to force a technology into a niche that it simply isn't designed to do, or is capable of doing without excessive inefficiency.

That is true also. But The Cloud in the UK seem to have made a good business from it.

That has more to do with the politics of business than it does the technology itself. The companies who have invested in paid hot spots don't want free municipal wifi.

That is part of it, but the other part of it is that technology truly doesn't scale well. Several networks have gotten past the political hurdles but I've only heard of one that actually delivered an acceptable network, and I think that was Ann Arbor, MI. Even Google's attempt was tepid at best, with poor signal strength everywhere and a slow network when you do get a connection.

Yes I recognize and agree with that. But at the same time when you are at a hot spot WiFi is a lot faster than 3G. Which is why Nokia and Blackberry are beginning to use it.
.

Nokia and Balckberry (among others) are not implementing wifi as a replacement for 3G, the only reason why Wifi is being included in high end enterprise handsets is as i said earlier for the ability to use a corporate IP Telephony solution on your mobile phone - it is seen as a fixed place data connection to use with a SIP client on the internal voice network.

So the senario is you have a Cisco IPT solution in a large office building, using wifi you extend that voice network across the building, putting SIP clients on wifi enabled phones enables you to discard your desk phone and have a single phone in dual mode. Mode 1 is internal using your mobile as a desktphone, free calls to other extensions in your office, people calling you by dialing your ext no. etc... Mode 2 is using the phone as normal and that includes 3G for mobile data.

This is the reason for the big push into wifi enables phones, this is the future of enterprise telephony, 3G will still play a massive part in that.

i was in paddington station yesterday and saw a big banner showing what wi-fi networks were in the station. one of these was the cloud. having free wi-fi for when i get out of the tube and am waiting for my train will be almost worth the contract price alone!

my wife and i were discussing the iphone last night. she is a designer too and a closet apple geek. she wants one ("if you are getting one then i am too"). BUT she was dismayed at no MMS. she sends MMS of our kids to the family all the time and that may be a deal breaker for her. i said "software update" to her, but that could be a while off. as i said in an earlier post, in the UK the lack of MMS could be a real problem for apple.

People keep saying "software update", "software update" but have Apple ever actually said themselves that any of these things will be fixed via updates? Or is it just more a case of well wishing.

Apple has said it would have major software updates that would bring new functionality to the phone. The unknown is exactly what those functions will be. People are hoping if they complain loudly enough Apple will include what ever function they want.

Of course Apple will include some and exclude others. Some people will be happy, some will complain.

my wife and i were discussing the iphone last night. she is a designer too and a closet apple geek. she wants one ("if you are getting one then i am too"). BUT she was dismayed at no MMS. she sends MMS of our kids to the family all the time and that may be a deal breaker for her.

i said "software update" to her, but that could be a while off. as i said in an earlier post, in the UK the lack of MMS could be a real problem for apple.

I wouldn't gamble on a software update fixing MMS support, unless Apple actually publicly says they're going to address the issue. After all, perhaps Jobs has some ideological thing against MMS... he's been known to be like that on occasion with certain technologies he considers 'outmoded'. \

That's why things like the 30-day trial period are so important... you get to check out the network and the phone, to see if they're right for you. But that's the US, not sure what they let you do in the UK on that one.

.

Well, if you buy things over the internet then there's a 7 (or 14, I can't remember) day money back guarantee, by law, on anything (except perishables like food). The company's not even allowed to charge a restocking fee, or charge you for return postage.